methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of Spotify Model Mapping with its method-specific working model.
Team Design
Spotify Model Mapping
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Purposedifferent
When a team landscape has grown without clear grouping, it maps roles and relationships onto the Spotify model. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Spotify model map and action list.When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences.When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
90-180 min45-90 min1-3 h20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
5-153-105-301-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Spotify Model Map, Action ListResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes
Tagsno overlap
TeamOrganizationAlignmentDiagnosis
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
Add more methods